The Reverse Dunning Kruger Effect

[Vorpal]

There is a tendency for certain mediocre professionals to make analysis errors occasionally based on some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Here are the elements of the effect:
1) the professional has some special training on a general understanding of a phenomenon that is valid.

2) specific details are made available by a lay person emersed in an issue related to the specialized understanding that controvert the usual wisdom in some fashion.

3) The lay person questions the professionals course of action.

4) The professional cites years of experience.

5) The professional insists on proceeding according to the protocol used generally.

Example A:
You are an 18 year old black woman who sees an intoxicated male on the street naked and disoriented. Police arrive but so does a man claiming to be the boyfriend of this dude.  The officers help the purported gay couple back an apartment.  You follow up and the cops did not treat the situation as an emergency.  You think the boy was too young and not just drunk.  The office states he has had 20 years of experience and an in-service training in alternative lifestyles.  He says you are overreacting to the existence of gay people and dismisses your concerns.

Anyone experience the reverse DK effect?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I get told I'm wrong often enough.

[Vorpal]

Example B:

You go in for elective cosmetic procedure expected to last 6 hours. You will be awake for the procedure but will be content reading. You know you are an introvert drained by the experience of even getting a haircut. You are concerned about being overtaxed by small talk and simply ask for the setting to be treated as if it were a library. You suggest that some routine questions be texted rather than spoken.

The staff recommend you take a Valium. You are completely calm. You decline. The staff give you a form to read and sign. You do. The staff then begin to reintegrate each detail on the form over again in simplistic drawn out language. You request that this be forestalled. They insist on continuing. You request that at least it would be reviewed faster.

The doctor explains that he is in charge and is loved by patients. He gives out his home phone in case of complication. He says his staff will have a hard time pretending they are in a library, and he knows what's best.

You are invited to leave it that is not okay with you. After all protocols of active engagement are in place to make patients comfortable.

[julep]

Post super-obviously ignores power the dynamics that skew these discussions, but what do I know? I'm suss to this particular puppet. Best actual advice in these situations is get out your camera and film, so that the viewers can provide context, experience, and interpretation. Then we can actually move society in a more informed, more positive direction.

[Vorpal]

Post super-obviously ignores power the  dynamics that skew these discussions, but what do I know? I'm suss to this particular puppet. Best actual advice in these situations is get out your camera and film, so that the viewers can provide context, experience, and interpretation. Then we can actually move society in a more informed, more positive direction.

That other thread is complete.
You are not welcome in this thread unless you can communicate without casting ridiculous aspersions.

[airportkid]

You are not welcome in this thread unless ...

Imposing prohibitions and restrictions on thread participation is implemented as a fee service, starting at $3,000/hr per prohibition per forum member affected, payable to the moderators in advance, and not in effect until the paid receipt is publicly posted in the Forum Rules section.

[Vera]

That other thread is complete.
You are not welcome in this thread unless you can communicate without casting ridiculous aspersions.

You, my poppet, do NOT get to decide when a thread is "complete", nor do you get to decide who can post in what thread.

[julep]

Post super-obviously ignores power the  dynamics that skew these discussions, but what do I know? I'm suss to this particular puppet. Best actual advice in these situations is get out your camera and film, so that the viewers can provide context, experience, and interpretation. Then we can actually move society in a more informed, more positive direction.

That other thread is complete.
You are not welcome in this thread unless you can communicate without casting ridiculous aspersions.

Ooh, I guess I'll have to post without being welcome. 

If you'd like to ignore my replies, you've demonstrated that you're familiar with the block function. The other thread, while not particularly relevant here, is not complete. No one asked you to resurrect it with your rape apologetics; doubtless other incels will find this thread and add to it as time goes on. If you're just indicating that your bit of the discussion is over because all of your points have been debunked...okay, fine with me.    

Ridiculous aspersions = puppet? The validity of Meyers-Briggs? Your reaction to a post in the thread-which-may-not-be-over which was not addressed to you seems to indicated that we have some kind of a history. Unfortunately your points are so predictable and the way you convey them is so dull that I can't quite bring you to mind. 

Give us a hint?

[jerry mcmasters]

There is a tendency for certain mediocre professionals to make analysis errors occasionally based on some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Here are the elements of the effect:
1) the professional has some special training on a general understanding of a phenomenon that is valid.

2) specific details are made available by a lay person emersed in an issue related to the specialized understanding that controvert the usual wisdom in some fashion.

3) The lay person questions the professionals course of action.

4) The professional cites years of experience.

5) The professional insists on proceeding according to the protocol used generally.

Example A:
You are an 18 year old black woman who sees an intoxicated male on the street naked and disoriented. Police arrive but so does a man claiming to be the boyfriend of this dude.  The officers help the purported gay couple back an apartment.  You follow up and the cops did not treat the situation as an emergency.  You think the boy was too young and not just drunk.  The office states he has had 20 years of experience and an in-service training in alternative lifestyles.  He says you are overreacting to the existence of gay people and dismisses your concerns.

Anyone experience the reverse DK effect?

Jeffry Daumer!!!  And I'm not even watching that show...not interested in torture porn.

I have definitely had the experience of doubting myself even when in my gut and head I thought I was right.  Is that what you mean by reverse DK?  Seems a personality propensity some people could have more than others.

[Vorpal]

I do not like being called an incel or apologist especially when there is no justification to do so. Further such mentions are obvious trolling.

I do think the power dynamic is relevant to the reverse DK effect. If you want to elaborate on that, it would be just swell.

[Vorpal]

There is a tendency for certain mediocre professionals to make analysis errors occasionally based on some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Here are the elements of the effect:
1) the professional has some special training on a general understanding of a phenomenon that is valid.

2) specific details are made available by a lay person emersed in an issue related to the specialized understanding that controvert the usual wisdom in some fashion.

3) The lay person questions the professionals course of action.

4) The professional cites years of experience.

5) The professional insists on proceeding according to the protocol used generally.

Example A:
You are an 18 year old black woman who sees an intoxicated male on the street naked and disoriented. Police arrive but so does a man claiming to be the boyfriend of this dude.  The officers help the purported gay couple back an apartment.  You follow up and the cops did not treat the situation as an emergency.  You think the boy was too young and not just drunk.  The office states he has had 20 years of experience and an in-service training in alternative lifestyles.  He says you are overreacting to the existence of gay people and dismisses your concerns.

Anyone experience the reverse DK effect?

Jeffry Daumer!!!  And I'm not even watching that show...not interested in torture porn.

I have definitely had the experience of doubting myself even when in my gut and head I thought I was right.  Is that what you mean by reverse DK?  Seems a personality propensity some people could have more than others.

You win full points!

That's the dynamic but it is between a lay person and a professional or self described elite.  Defensiveness
Blinds the professional from considering an almost obvious course of action.  Adherence to protocol and surliness lead to errors in logic.

They did not even run a quick background check on Dahmer.  That would have been giving in to the black girls.

[jerry mcmasters]

That's the dynamic but it is between a lay person and a professional or self described elite.  Defensiveness
Blinds the professional from considering an almost obvious course of action.  Adherence to protocol and surliness lead to errors in logic.

They did not even run a quick background check on Dahmer.  That would have been giving in to the black girls.

Agreed.  Some fields of knowledge it would be stupid and even suicidal to not readily defer to the professionals.  Others, I’m not as confident.

[Bucky Ball]

There is a tendency for certain mediocre professionals to make analysis errors occasionally based on some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Here are the elements of the effect:
1) the professional has some special training on a general understanding of a phenomenon that is valid.

2) specific details are made available by a lay person emersed in an issue related to the specialized understanding that controvert the usual wisdom in some fashion.

3) The lay person questions the professionals course of action.

4) The professional cites years of experience.

5) The professional insists on proceeding according to the protocol used generally.

Example A:
You are an 18 year old black woman who sees an intoxicated male on the street naked and disoriented. Police arrive but so does a man claiming to be the boyfriend of this dude.  The officers help the purported gay couple back an apartment.  You follow up and the cops did not treat the situation as an emergency.  You think the boy was too young and not just drunk.  The office states he has had 20 years of experience and an in-service training in alternative lifestyles.  He says you are overreacting to the existence of gay people and dismisses your concerns.

Anyone experience the reverse DK effect?

No.

1. Not in the definition.
2. Not necessarily.
3. Not necessarily.
4. Possibly.
5. Nope.

Conclusion : you don't know anything about the DKE and your invention of a "reverse effect" has no basis based on what you have presented.
There are all kinds of actual "specialists" who just get their shit wrong.

[jerry mcmasters]

Sigh. Does every conversation have to go to DefCon 5 by post three? A phenomenon we all have experienced is being described. Vorpal do you believe this is common or rare?

[Vorpal]

There is a tendency for certain mediocre professionals to make analysis errors occasionally based on some kind of cognitive dissonance.

Here are the elements of the effect:
1) the professional has some special training on a general understanding of a phenomenon that is valid.

2) specific details are made available by a lay person emersed in an issue related to the specialized understanding that controvert the usual wisdom in some fashion.

3) The lay person questions the professionals course of action.

4) The professional cites years of experience.

5) The professional insists on proceeding according to the protocol used generally.

Example A:
You are an 18 year old black woman who sees an intoxicated male on the street naked and disoriented. Police arrive but so does a man claiming to be the boyfriend of this dude.  The officers help the purported gay couple back an apartment.  You follow up and the cops did not treat the situation as an emergency.  You think the boy was too young and not just drunk.  The office states he has had 20 years of experience and an in-service training in alternative lifestyles.  He says you are overreacting to the existence of gay people and dismisses your concerns.

Anyone experience the reverse DK effect?

No.

1. Not in the definition.
2. Not necessarily.
3. Not necessarily.
4. Possibly.
5. Nope.

Conclusion : you don't know anything about the DKE and your invention of a "reverse effect" has no basis based on what you have presented.
There are all kinds of actual "specialists" who just get their shit wrong.

Well no. The reverse effect isn't  a mirror image of the original cognitive bias.  It's when people with high expertise ignore cues to further assess a situation because they discount an informants point because they are not a professional.

And it is different from a more straight forward error.

[Bucky Ball]

No.

1. Not in the definition.
2. Not necessarily.
3. Not necessarily.
4. Possibly.
5. Nope.

Conclusion : you don't know anything about the DKE and your invention of a "reverse effect" has no basis based on what you have presented.
There are all kinds of actual "specialists" who just get their shit wrong.

Well no. The reverse effect isn't  a mirror image of the original cognitive bias.  It's when people with high expertise ignore cues to further assess a situation because they discount an informants point because they are not a professional.

Well no. Don't know where you got your definition, (which you did not post, and you incorrectly described), AND you repeatedly used the term "professional" (incorrectly) which is not in the definition.

"The Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain, (that would NOT include professionals) greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general."

[Vorpal]

Sigh.  Does every conversation have to go to DefCon 5 by post three?  A phenomenon we all have experienced is being described.  Vorpal do you believe this is common or rare?

Relatively rare, but more common than professionals are willing to admit.

[Bucky Ball]

Sigh.  Does every conversation have to go to DefCon 5 by post three?  A phenomenon we all have experienced is being described.  Vorpal do you believe this is common or rare?

Really ? This from what you have been doing for days (years ?) with Thump ?
It often happens when this bullshit is included :

You are not welcome in this thread unless you can communicate without casting ridiculous aspersions.

[Bucky Ball]

Sigh.  Does every conversation have to go to DefCon 5 by post three?  A phenomenon we all have experienced is being described.  Vorpal do you believe this is common or rare?

Relatively rare, but more common than professionals are willing to admit.

Data source ?

[Vorpal]

Bucky,
Remember the social psych study where a normal person admitted himself to a mental hospital and was kept a whole week? The patients questioned why he was there sooner than the staff. Classic reverse DK.

The Rosenhan study

[jerry mcmasters]

Sigh.  Does every conversation have to go to DefCon 5 by post three?  A phenomenon we all have experienced is being described.  Vorpal do you believe this is common or rare?

Really ? This from what you have been doing for days (years ?) with Thump ?
It often happens when this bullshit is included :

You are not welcome in this thread unless you can communicate without casting ridiculous aspersions.

Lol.  Respectful exchanges of ideas are always in store when the opening objection is "No."  No doubt I will be proven wrong here.

[airportkid]

Dunning-Kroeger has no relevance to what I think the gist is here:  that sometimes a layperson will second-guess a professional's decision, is ignored, and in some circumstances it turns out the layperson's assessment was more correct than the professional's, sometimes with tragic consequences.

Happens every day, albeit the "tragedies" are most commonly inconveniences rather than life altering.

But such instances are NOT an argument that it's always a good idea as someone ignorant in a field to second guess the more knowledgeable party.  Experts goof up, but they have it right MOST of the time.  To interfere out of ignorance only INCREASES the likelihood of a goofed up outcome.

This is a HUGE problem in medicine, as ignorant patients and their friends and family forget that the medical practitioners base their decisions on experience and knowledge FAR greater than the laypeoples', and laypeople, following their gut, cause more misery and death rather than less.  Witness the response to the Covid pandemic and vaccination.

[Bucky Ball]

A "Reverse Dunning-Krueger" would be a cognitive bias whereby people with high knowledge or extraordinary competence in a given social or intellectual domain greatly UNDERTESTIMATE their own knowledge and/or competence relative to objective criteria, the performance of their peers, or of people in general".

[Vorpal]

A "Reverse Dunning-Krueger" would be a cognitive bias whereby people with high knowledge or extraordinary competence in a given social or intellectual domain greatly UNDERTESTIMATE their own knowledge and/or competence relative to objective criteria, the performance of their peers, or of people in general".

That already has a name: the imposter syndrome.

[Vorpal]

Airport,
I think professionals could work on reducing smugness and being open to factors that buck what a general trend would suggest. I think some professionals inoculate themselves from this kind of error by remembering to check their ego at the door and find enjoyment in being thorough detectives rather than dictators.